At 06:08 PM 4/30/2003 +1000, John Campbell wrote:
>DAT and HD are not "lossy compression" at all. Having captured bits
>via analogue to digital conversion, they do not then purposefully
>reduce the bit-rate through requantisation - and that is, I repeat,
>what lossy compression means. So the issue IS that ATRAC is lossy.
A correct definition, but unless you are contending that a first-ge=
neration ATRAC recording is inferior to a DAT or HD recording, it doesn't m=
atter. Who is going to make ATRAC copies of ATRAC recordings?
The only helpful way to use the term 'lossy' is as an explanation o=
f why one recording is inferior to another. You can't use the term as the p=
roof.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Chuck Bragg, Pacific Palisades, CA
Membership Chair
Santa Monica Bay Audubon Society:
http://smbas.cjb.net
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|